June 16, 1993

As individuals, and with all due respect to Tribal process,
Legaliaison/Peace Park humbly suggests that:

SERIOUS INDIVIDUALS INTERESTED
IN TRANSCENDING THE MINDLESS SPLIT OF THE 1993 RAINBOW FAMILY
GATHERINGS OF THE TRIBES, AND WHO SEEK UNITY IN OPPOSITION TO
GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS WHICH WOULD CRIMINALIZE FUTURE GATHERINGS,
ATTEND THE FREEDOM OF BELIEF, EXPRESSION AND ASSEMBLY COUNCIL
IN D.C. THIS COUNCIL WILL BEGIN IN THE 2nd WEEK IN JULY AND CONTINUE
UNTIL THERE IS NO FURTHER INTEREST IN DISCUSSING AND ACTING
TO OPPOSE MINDLESS OPPRESSION.

Any actions or opinions of Legaliaison\DC Crew used to
be subject to approval of Rainbow Family Council July 1-7, on
the land. After this year's Rainbow Family Council, however, "the
Council" may be unable to even approve opinions on where
"the land" was.

Once each year, from July 1-7, for the past 21 years the
Rainbow Family of Living Light has gathered on the land to celebrate
unity and to pray for peace on earth. This year the Family has
been unable to even agree on a state in which the unity and prayer
for peace will happen. Thus, it appears, this July there will
be two separate gatherings for unity and peace, divided by opinion,
ego, and about three hundred miles. This diversity is possible
because, since the United States began some two hundred years
ago, it has been taken for granted that citizens have an INALIENABLE
RIGHT to freely assemble on public lands.

Unfortunately, this year the Rainbow Family also faces
the greatest threat to its continued existence that it has ever
encountered. The Eugene, Oregon Register-Guard (May 8, 1993),
and other public media, have reported, "the Forest Service
has proposed new regulations requiring equal treatment for large
groups of people seeking permits to gather in national forests."
Having grown quite accustomed to being regulated, the American
public may well mistake this government misinformation for the
truth. In fact, if enacted this regulation would have the effect
of transforming the traditional Rainbow Gathering into a crime,
punishable by fine and imprisonment.

Since 1988, at the request of Rainbow Family members, Legaliaison\DC
has been gathering information about the government's progress
in promulgating this regulation. Legaliaison has disseminated
that information, along with opinions and suggestions relating
to the regulation, to various individuals who have expressed concern
about the issue.

The Rainbow Family is often described as a group of free-
thinkers. So, as one might expect, the
Family contains many brilliant legal minds. Owing to this brilliant
diversity, in addition to a physical split
within the Family there also appears to be a spiritual/intellectual/political/legal/whatever
split.

Legaliaison\DC feels as if it is caught between a police
state scheme designed to crush individuality and a torrent of
Family power trips. On the one hand many many individuals have
been calling Legaliaison with queries, information, misinformation,
rumors and advice about the site of the Gathering. Because Legaliaison
is (1) very preoccupied with efforts to
derail the government's regulation, (2) couldn't care less
where the site is, and (3) is deeply disturbed by the fact that,
as the Family faces this monumental threat to its very existence,
there seems to be enough disunity within the Family to insure
its demise; our position is: if you can't get it together, vote
with your feet.

Spiritually/politically/whatever speaking, based on our
reading of All Ways Free and a note from its
editorial staff, we are disturbed to find that some of what may
be the Family's keenest philosophical minds feel that we have
wrongly "mix(ed) Rainbow Legaliaison material & Peace Park,
Proposition One stuff."

The simple FACT (as distinct from an
opinion) is that the proposed Forest Service regulations, and
the regulations in Peace Park share precisely the same legal precedents.
E.g., Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence, 468 U.S. 290,
see, Fed. Reg. May 6, 1993, page 26940. If this regulation is
enacted those who fail to apprehend this fact will understand
that "Rainbow Family cause" was really not so different
from "Peace Park cause." We stress this FACT now so
that if, God forbid, our dire predictions
come to pass, we may then share a better understanding with those
wonderfully optimistic brothers and sisters who presently trust
the courts to uphold the right of peaceable assembly.

All Ways Free mistakenly mixes OPINION with FACT (page
16), "The problem we have been facing for years, and which
faces us now, is that the comments the Forest Service are asking
us to make within the current 90-day public commentary period
will be addressed to the same bureaucrats in their ranks that
have been working for years to make the Regulations a reality."

True, Forest Service bureaucrats have
been working on this regulation for years, but anyone who imagines
the Rainbow Family has secrets that the Forest Service doesn't
know just hasn't been reading all the Forest
Service reports. An equally valid opinion about "the
problem which faces us now" is that the government (administrative,
judicial and legislative branches) has progressively enacted,
enforced, and condoned -- while the public has acquiesced to --
ever more restrictive regulations, and that this regulation is
merely the "logical" extension of ever more restrictive
POLICIES. It was conceived by the Reagan/Bush crew, has been blessed
by the Clinton crew, and is aimed at a bunch of hippies. Anyone
who thinks the problem just comes from some "bureaucrats,"
and expects the system's courts to rule in favor of the hippies,
is just blissin' out.

To the best of our knowledge, Legaliaison/DC
was first to note the government's POLICY of "pro-active"
enforcement/management. All Ways Free picked right up on it (page
16). Legaliaison proposes that this POLICY of "pro-active"
enforcement is nothing more than the domestic application of the
international POLICY known as "Peace through Strength,"
and THAT is a big a problem.

When enough people agree, anything can become law. Law
may be either reasonable or ruthless, creative or destructive.
Whether we consider ourselves "political" or not, this
regulation may help us begin to recognize how harshly we can be
affected by law.

Proposition One is a grassroots international voter initiative
campaign which will officially be going to D.C. voters
on the September 14, 1993 ballot as Initiative #37. As law, Proposition
One would initiate significant structural change. Once enough
people agree that Proposition One is the law, humanity would have
a legal foundation for converting destructive industries into
meeting human needs, and converting the policy of Peace through
Pro-active Enforcement into Peace through Understanding.

In our opinion, " Proposition One stuff" is no
more political, no less related, but, in the long run, more practical
to this "Rainbow cause" than "Plan B" -- which
Legaliaison has been extremely active in promoting for months
anyway.

Legaliaison\DC certainly never meant to suggest any kind
of a merger between the Proposition One entity
and the Rainbow non-entity. (Believe it or not, some members of
the boards of directors and advisors of the Proposition One Committee
don't take the Rainbow Family very seriously, and might not consider
a public endorsement by the Rainbow Family to be politically desirable.)
Legaliaison merely suggested, call it "Plan C," that
individuals pooling effort into Proposition One could positively
address the problem of systemic "pro-active enforcement."

Assuming All Ways Free has the "authority" to
present "Plan B" -- -- which certainly could seem to
be "political" -- as a suggested
"official" Rainbow action, Legaliaison cannot understand
how All Ways Free can object to the suggestion of Proposition
One as a possible action strategy. It might even be asked whether
All Ways Free has done a considerable disservice both to the Family
and objectivity by failing to publish a complete presentation
of the options available to combat the government's scheme.

Legaliaison has called for a "Freedom of Belief, Expression
and Assembly Council," beginning the 2nd week in July in
D.C. An All Ways Free person has opposed a D.C. Council because
they "can't" make it to D.C. in July. To folks with
that problem we say, fine, stay home and write letters to your
federal representative, but please, for the First Amendment's
sake, don't throw obstacles in the way of those who might want
to do more.

Committed to truth, equality, justice and freedom, and
having minimized their own participation in the Babylonian system,
many individuals performing service for Legaliaisom in D.C. sometimes
tend to lack a certain degree of tolerance toward individuals
who profess commitment to the same ideals, but, perhaps, owing
to some level of commitment to the Babylonian system, just "can't"
take the time and energy to serve the mutual
ideals. Pardon us.